CHAPTER 20 The Black Art of successful lying: Gulf War 1991: The Tavistock Institute for Human Relations by Dr. John Coleman from antimatrix.org

From this background, what we saw in the Gulf War circa
1991 was frightening enough to very forcefully remind us of
the origin of the black art of successful lying practiced by
Lord Bryce and what a congenital, witting liar he had turned
out to be. It also brought to mind how Wellington House and
then Tavistock set its seal on brainwashing as a tool of war. It
was one of the deciding factors that made me determined to
write this work and expose Tavistock and its injurious, baleful
influence.
In the Gulf War the U.S. Department of Defense shut out all
news media and appointed its own spokesman who gave his
grossly untruthful version of events via television broadcasts.
I dubbed the fellow "Pentagon Pete" and he talked blithely
about "collateral damage" a new Tavistock phrase being tried
for the first time ever. It took the public a long time to catch
on to its meaning - human casualties, human deaths and
destruction of property.
Then we had a break when CNN was allowed to come in and
report on the success of the "Patriot" missile defense shooting
down Iraqi SCUDS, which it turned out, was another base
exercise in propaganda. According to CNN at least one
SCUD attacking Israel was shot down every night. Only
World In Review, in the midst of the war, reported that not a
single SCUD missile had been shot down. Nobody dared to
report that a total of 15 SCUDS had hit Tel Aviv and other
parts of Israel. Disinformation and misinformation prevailed.
Only WIR reported the truth, but with a small readership, it
didn't matter to the propagandists.
Then there was the gigantic fraud perpetrated on the
American people by one of the largest Public Relations
companies in Washington, Hilton and Knowles.
Here again, only WIR broke the story that the whole tear-
jerking episode of Iraqi soldiers pulling out new-born Kuwait
babies from incubators and throwing them on the floor, was a
gross falsehood. It is interesting that like Benton and Bowles,
Hilton and Knowles had long ties to the Tavistock Institute.
Both companies were leading "advertising" agencies.
The Hilton and Knowles fabrication, tearfully narrated by an
"eye witness," (who just happened to be the teenage daughter
of the Al Sabah family's Kuwaiti ambassador to Washington)
was what swayed the Senate to violate the U.S. Constitution
and "give" Bush the elder, "permission" to attack Iraq,
despite the fact that no such provision exists in the U.S.
Constitution. While Bush the elder could say; - "Well, I didn't
know this, I didn't hire Hilton and Knowles," he plainly knew
all about the key propaganda stunt pulled off against the
American people. Nobody will ever believe that he did not
recognize the sixteen-year old daughter of the Kuwaiti
ambassador, who he had met before.
The Kuwaiti ambassador paid Hilton and Knowles $600,000
to stage the elaborate fraud in front of the Senate, for which
he ought to have been arrested for lying to a Senate
committee. What was so galling is that the daughter also
went unpunished for her part in tearfully recounting her
experience: "I saw the Iraqi soldiers pull the new born babies
out of the incubators and thrown them on the ground," she
cried.
The fact of the matter was that Narita Al Sabah had not been
anywhere near Kuwait for years, and certainly not during the
war! She had been in Washington D.C. with her father at the
ambassador's Washington residence. Yet this child-liar and
her father were not prosecuted. That is what the propaganda
experts at Tavistock call "a successful remake of events."
Narita Al Sabah's testimony became the centerpiece of a huge
media campaign in America, and it is known to have swayed
not only the Senate, but put the American people on the side
of the war against Iraq.
Bush the elder indulged in an old propaganda piece in telling
the world that "Saaadam" had to be removed from Iraq "to
make the Middle East safe." (Remember that Wilson sent
American troops to their death in France to "make the world
safe for democracy.") Bush the elder suddenly began
vilifying and demonizing the Iraqi president to suit the
purposes of his oil cartel friends, and, as in the case of the
Kaiser in 1913, it worked.
Not many people remembered the ploy put on by Wilson,
otherwise they might have noticed the striking similarity in
what President Bush was saying, and what Bryce told Wilson
and what Wilson told the American people to sway them to
support WWI. Now that Hussein is all but forgotten and the
threats he allegedly posed have all been dismissed as a pack
of lies, all of a sudden it is "Al Qaeda" we have to worry
about.
Woodrow Wilson used plain propaganda when he told a
reluctant American people that the war would "make the
world safe for democracy." Bush intoned the same veritable
deceit.
The cost of making the world "safe for democracy" was
horrendous. Professor William Langer placed the known
dead of WWI at 10,000,000 men and women soldiers and
20,000,000 wounded. Russia alone lost 9,000,000 men killed
or an astonishing 75 percent of its army. The total cost of the
war in dollars has been figured at $180,000,000,000 to which
must be added the indirect costs of $151,612,500,000.